About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
the charges, miranda rights, the public safety exemption, where are we right now on that issue? >> well, the normal rule is that when someone's irsed, they're advised of their rights. you have the right to remain silent. anything you say can be used against you. you have the right to a lawyer. if you can't afford one it will be provided, that sort of thing. if police don't give that warning then they cannot use any statements of the defendant in court. the exception to that is called the public safety exception. it's been extended by judges to terrorism cases. and the idea is that if you need information quickly to preserve public safety, you can ask those questions and still use the responses in court. but that public safety exception rule is limited. it only applies for several hours after fill in the blank. we assume after questioning starts rather than after arrest. probably no more than a day, day and a half. >> where do you come up with that? pete, let me interrupt you there. who has come up with what is the time? is it just, you know it when you see it? >> in terms of the time li
, this investigation still very much continuing. justice departments saying the suspect will not be read his miranda rights. they are invoking the public safety exception. it's allowed in cases of immediate danger. meanwhile mccain and lindsay graham said dzhokhar tsarnaev should be treated as a potential enemy combatant. they said now that the suspect is in custody is the last thing we should want is for him to remain silent. under a law of war we can hold the suspect to a enemy combatment not entitled to miranda warnings or the appointment of counsel. the older brother, he was killed on friday, and they investigated him at the request of a foreign government, and they did not find any ties to terrorism. and we are joined from london by a counterterrorism expert, and mike sullivan here is a former acting director of the bureau of tobacco, firearms and explosives. let's start with you in london, will. the fbi talked to this man in 2011. it does beg the question, did they miss something when they talked to tamerlan tsarnaev? >> well, it's always very difficult to say. however, having said that, if yo
him before he receives miranda warning is the right thing to do. a short time ago, the aclu put out a statement saying every defendant is entitled to defend miranda lights. five lawmakers want him treated as an enemy combatant. 53 people remain in boston hospitals today, three in critical condition, including a 7-year-old girl. nbc news national investigative correspondent michaels i cough is in boston, ron allen outside boston's beth israel medical center where the suspect and many of the victims are being kept and kristen we willinger at the white house, let's get to the latest on investigation. for that, we turn to michaels i cough, again, in boston. what is the fbi focusing on today and moving forward? >> reporter: federal prosecutors are focusing on drafting a criminal complaint we could see as early as this afternoon, detailing the criminal charges against him supported by an affidavit from an fbi agent that would lay out some details of the plot. not all of them but could provide crucial new information for us about what tsarnaev actually did and raise and shed some light on
enforcement. we know that doesn't quite work for several reasons. one, there is an exception in the miranda rights. when a suspect is read their rights by the police, we're talking about a miranda warning. there is a provision that allows in case law that allows for law enforcement to wait if they think there is a national security threat or a danger to the public until they've talked to the person and established there isn't a danger to the public or gotten the information they need. then they can read the miranda rights. that's what the fbi has done in this case. that's what they did in the new york time square bomber. that worked quite well. they talk to him for a while before they read him his rights. then they read him his rights. he kept and he provided very valuable information. we know that the traditional civilian court system founded by the founding fathers can work in this situation. >> let me ask you a couple questions. if the russian government was so concerned about tamerlan as to alert our fbi and our government, and warrant an investigation of him, why are we so sure that dz
by federal authorities. but in the beginning, he will not be given the usual miranda warning about the right to remain silent. instead, the government will invoke a rule that allows questioning a suspect without giving advice of rights. >> there is a public safety exemption in cases of national security, and central charges involving acts of terrorism, and so government has that opportunity right now. >> the government invoked that same rule in the case of the so-called underwear bomber. as in his case, it allows questioning to learn of any potential plots or accomplices that could present a continuing threat. >> the first questions the fbi will focus on are specific threats that he might be aware of. likely, are there any other improvised explosive devices? were there other people working in the network? the sorts of things that go directly to whether or not there's a continuing threat to public safety. >> reporter: he'll face charges brought by the justice department, because terrorism is a federal crime with a trial in a regular civilian court. and as in other high profile terrorism cases
not get his miranda rights. >> among of group of republicans calling for the boston bombing suspect to be considered an enemy combatant. that means he would not have the same constitutional protection as a regular citizen, with regard to what he says as the investigation moves forward. will this happen? california congressman, a senior member of the intelligence committee. congressman, always good to see you. i know that you disagree with the congressman and think that the suspect is in custody. is entitled to his miranda rights. why? >> well, i think the administration is handling it exactly correct. there is a public safety exception under the miranda allowing law enforcement to interview him, making sure there are no other bombs, threats, perpetrators still out there giving the law enforcement flexibility to do the that prior to miranda and i think the court will interpret it broadly and give them the time they need to make sure that the public is safe. after that, he will have to be mirandized, doesn't mean the end of cooperation, but no basis yet to conclude they should be trea
okayed the suspension of the suspect's miranda rights. is that a temporary suspension? >> reporter: yes, by law it is. it's called the public safety exception to the miranda rule. normally you have to tell someone they have a right to remain silent and if you don't, then you can't use anything they tell you in court. so that's why the miranda warning is given. but there is an exception. you don't have to do it if there's a possible threat to public safety. and here obviously there's a concern about whether there are potential accomplices. investigators say they haven't found any. or other explosives. they say they haven't found any of those either but that's what they want to ask him. and this exception probably begins to expire the moment you invoke it so it's probably no good for more than a day or two but nonetheless they can do that. afterwards they'll have to give him his miranda warning and say whether he'll continue to answer questions. the justice department says even in very serious cases like this, most people in custody do continue to talk. >> pete, who's going to be interrog
to give him a miranda warning. >> which deals with public security threat. do investigators have a good handle, pete, on how big an arsenal they had? >> you know, we have heard conflicting things about this. we know they had a lot of finished bombs because they threw a lot of them out of the car as the police were chasing them thursday night, friday morning. they were throwing these little homemade hand grenades they had out and another pressure cooker device although it wasn't a fully finished one because we heard accounts that they lit it, which is different than the one set off on the two at the boston marathon. so they had seven, eight explosives. how many guns they had is unclear at this point. >> apparently they were using at least one or two of them in that friday night shootout. we're getting new details about how all of that went down. is it right that tamerlan got out of the car. he apparently approached police with a gun. they take him down but then he was still alive and his brother ran him over? >> that's correct. may have dragged him for a short time as well. >> presumably
yesterday applauding the suspension of miranda rights for the teenage suspect. he even suggested we haven't gone far enough. and advocated for labeling the suspect an enemy combatant. by defining this week's events as terrorism, we endow the violence with political meaning. when we call their homemade bombs but not adam lanza's bush master xm 15 rifle weapons of mass destruction, we sent out a trajectory for the prosecution when we focus on months that one suspect spent overseas rather than the years that both spent in the u.s. we assume a limited geography for the incubation of evil. so here we go. the crisis is over and the politics begin. folks, this is actually the most dangerous part. with me at the table today is msnbc contributor and georgetown university professor, michael eric dyson. valerie core, a writer and fi filmmak filmmaker. co-host of the cycle and robert pape, director of the project security and -- >> bb, let me start with you. what do you think happened this week? >> what i think happened is we had homegrown terrorism come to the united states. since 9/11, this is the
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9